Is obeying the Lord and His Commandments required for salvation?

[GodsGrace]

Again the Bible defines sin as transgression of God's law. Therefore one is not, cannot be a sinner until they are capable of sinning against God.
Before Adam and Eve sinned Eden was a perfect paradise. After they sinned physical sickness and death along with spiritual death entered the world as a consequence of their sinning. We today suffer these consequences of their sinning but do not inherit sin from them. Man is not a sinner unless and until he commits a transgression against God.

We do not inherit sin from Adam.
We are only responsible for our own sin.

Could you PLEASE show me where in the N.T. it states we are born good? (or neutral).
I just don't see it.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

We do not inherit sin from Adam.
We are only responsible for our own sin.

I agree.

Could you PLEASE show me where in the N.T. it states we are born good? (or neutral).
I just don't see it.

Rom 9:11 children are born having done no evil (not sinners) or having done no good (not righteous) so they are neutral, a blank slate so to speak.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

The old man that diese in Romans 6:1-7 is a man of sin.
HOW do we know he was not born that way?

When I became a Christian some taught that we are born good.
I could not find this idea in the N.T.

You posted yourself in post #361 that:
We do not inherit sin from Adam.
We are only responsible for our own sin.

Since infants are not born with sin, and are not capable of sinning, and have done no evil they cannot be born "babies of sin"

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Eve was deceived.
Genesis 3:13

But we now know what sin is and can no longer be deceived and instead we sin.

I don't agree. People today can and are are deceived by sin; 1 Cor 15:33; 2 Tim 3:13; Titus 3:3;

Adam, representing all mankind, sinned, thus bringing sin into the world.

You say we are born good.
How do you justify this?
Are there verses in the N.T. that state this?

I said all are born neutral, born a blank slate having done no good or evil.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

You are one of the very few people I have seen that seem to understand this principle.


We who are Christ’s do indeed have the hope of eternal life.

But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. Titus 3:4-7

• having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

If we are heirs, then we have the hope of inheriting eternal life.


And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands, for My name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and inherit eternal life. Matthew 19:29



However we who are joined to the Lord and are one spirit with Him are joined to and are one with the Spirit of life in Christ.


But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him.
1 Corinthians 6:17


However, we know that to have everlasting life, it means we can not die, and we know our physical bodies will indeed die someday, except those who are raptured.


So the hope of everlasting life is seen in the resurrection of the dead in Christ.


Paul says it this way to the Romans —


For we were saved in this hope, but hope that is seen is not hope; for why does one still hope for what he sees? But if we hope for what we do not see, we eagerly wait for it with perseverance. Romans 8:24-25

• for why does one still hope for what he sees?

Paul says we are waiting for salvation eagerly... even the resurrection of our mortal bodies, when Christ Jesus returns.



Amen, come Lord Jesus.


JLB

It can be confusing for some because verses as Jn 5:24 which says "hath everlasting life". Yet other verses say eternal life is a promise (1 Jn 2:25). A promise being something not yet realized. Other verses speak of eternal life in the next life in world to come (Luke 18:30).
Since the Bible does not contradict itself, these verses do not contradict each other. The explanation lies in the fact God cannot lie so His promises (as eternal life) are so certain they are sometimes spoken of as already existing even though they do not. God had made Abraham a father of many nations (Gen 17:5) even though Isaac was not yet even born. To which Paul said God" calleth those things which do not exist as if they did." Rom 4:17

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I agree, we are not sinners until we commit sin. But we do suffer the consequences of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve, as you just said.

So then, please explain what we are disagreeing on?

So we agree infants are born innocent, born sinless having done no good or evil Rom 9:11? We agree that infants are not born with a sin nature, no total depravity?

 

[JLB]

It can be confusing for some because verses as Jn 5:24 which says "hath everlasting life". Yet other verses say eternal life is a promise (1 Jn 2:25). A promise being something not yet realized. Other verses speak of eternal life in the next life in world to come (Luke 18:30).
Since the Bible does not contradict itself, these verses do not contradict each other. The explanation lies in the fact God cannot lie so His promises (as eternal life) are so certain they are sometimes spoken of as already existing even though they do not. God had made Abraham a father of many nations (Gen 17:5) even though Isaac was not yet even born. To which Paul said God" calleth those things which do not exist as if they did." Rom 4:17

There is having eternal life now, which is knowing Him, being joined to Him, as one Spirit with Him.


Then there is everlasting life we will receive on the Day of Judgement when we are resurrected from the dead, and receive glorified sinless bodies that will never die anymore.


By rightly dividing God’s word, we can see the truth, and understand what the Lord is saying.


God, who “will render to each one according to his deeds”: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, Romans 2:6-8

• eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;

This is received at the end of a life spent faithfully serving the Lord, in which the Spirit led us in a life of obedience;
A life of obeying the truth.


again


Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage. But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage; nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. Luke 20:34-36

• for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.

Again this verse speaks of us obtaining a body that will no longer die and being as the angels are, the sons of God.


That being said, I will note in keeping with the op.


Angels, sons of God who have eternal life and are not exempt from going to hell in which they lose their eternal life in exchange for eternal death, BECAUSE they disobeyed the Lord.


For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
2 Peter 2:4-5










JLB

 

[Tradidi]

So we agree infants are born innocent, born sinless having done no good or evil Rom 9:11? We agree that infants are not born with a sin nature, no total depravity?

I agree with the first part. I have never used the terms "sin nature" or "total depravity" before and I don't really know what you understand by them, so I can't comment on the second part.

Do you agree that being tempted is not a sin, but that only when we give in to temptation we commit a sin?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I agree with the first part. I have never used the terms "sin nature" or "total depravity" before and I don't really know what you understand by them, so I can't comment on the second part.

Do you agree that being tempted is not a sin, but that only when we give in to temptation we commit a sin?

The idea of sin nature/total depravity is that man is born with a nature that will impel, cause him to sin. Man does not have to be born with such a nature to sin, Adam had no such nature but was able to sin.


I agree that being tempted is not a sin.

 

[The Light]

The result of Adam's transgression brought about death for all of Adam's seed. To be saved from the wages of sin, death, and receive the gift of lasting life, one must submit themselves to the rule of King Jesus and be a willing and obedient subject to His reign. Therefore, obedience is required to be saved from the penalty of lasting deadness, (death).

 

[Tradidi]

I agree that being tempted is not a sin.

Do you agree that some people are stronger than others at resisting temptation? And that those who are weaker are not committing sin by being weak?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Do you agree that some people are stronger than others at resisting temptation? And that those who are weaker are not committing sin by being weak?

Being weak is not a sin but it is not an excuse either.

I do think it would be sinful for one not to work on his weakness in order to get stronger; Hebrews 12:12

 

[Tradidi]

Being weak is not a sin but it is not an excuse either.

I do think it would be sinful for one not to work on his weakness in order to get stronger; Hebrews 12:12

Then why do you have a problem with Original State, which is not a sin, but rather a weakness that we are all born with?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Then why do you have a problem with Original State, which is not a sin, but rather a weakness that we are all born with?

Weaknesses are by choice, not how one is born. As I posted in my last post, weakness is not an excuse for sinning. No one can excuse their sinning on how they were born.

 

[Tradidi]

Weaknesses are by choice, not how one is born. As I posted in my last post, weakness is not an excuse for sinning. No one can excuse their sinning on how they were born.

I agree that if there is no choice, there can be no sin, at least not subjectively.

I also agree that weakness is no excuse for sinning.

But I do not see why you could claim that "weaknesses are by choice". Do you think anyone chooses to be weak? Our Lord urges us to pray so that we do not enter into temptation. Why? Because, even though the spirit is willing, "the flesh is weak". That does not sound like a choice to me, but rather like a handicap or a difficulty we have to try and overcome.

Watch ye: and pray that you enter not into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Mark 14:38)

Hence, St. Paul says "For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do." (Romans 7:15) St. Paul wants to do good, but often finds himself doing evil because of the weakness of the flesh, against his will.

I just don't see how you can say that we are weak by choice.

 

[JLB]

The result of Adam's transgression brought about death for all of Adam's seed. To be saved from the wages of sin, death, and receive the gift of lasting life, one must submit themselves to the rule of King Jesus and be a willing and obedient subject to His reign. Therefore, obedience is required to be saved from the penalty of lasting deadness, (death).

Well said sir!




Maybe Kemi K could share her thoughts on why she believes people don’t have to obey the Lord to be saved?


Only if she wants to though.




JLB

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I agree that if there is no choice, there can be no sin, at least not subjectively.

I also agree that weakness is no excuse for sinning.

But I do not see why you could claim that "weaknesses are by choice". Do you think anyone chooses to be weak? Our Lord urges us to pray so that we do not enter into temptation. Why? Because, even though the spirit is willing, "the flesh is weak". That does not sound like a choice to me, but rather like a handicap or a difficulty we have to try and overcome.

Watch ye: and pray that you enter not into temptation. The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak. (Mark 14:38)

Hence, St. Paul says "For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do." (Romans 7:15) St. Paul wants to do good, but often finds himself doing evil because of the weakness of the flesh, against his will.

I just don't see how you can say that we are weak by choice.

What Paul did, he chose to do for Paul says "that I do". He cannot excuse the sinning he did on how he was born. People are born with physical weakness. Those disciples wanted in their spirit to be watchful, but physically could not stay awake and be watchful (Mk 14:38) but Christ enemies were awake (Mk 14:43).

The Christian is to have self control Gal 5:23 over his fleshly desires. Jesus was God in the flesh and chose to keep His fleshly desires under control. All God created in Gen 1:31 was good. God created man with desires....desires for sleep, food, water, love, sex, companionship, approval among peers, etc. But it is man's responsibility to rule over those desires so they will not cause him to sin. And this responsibility requires free will in man choosing what he will do. In the garden, Adam and Eve allowed the flesh to rule in the lust of the eye causing them to sin. But they were held accountable for their choice. They could not blame God for the desires He gave them when He created them.

Therefore they, nor us, can blame our weak flesh for our choosing to sin. God does not tempt man in the way He made man with desires. But when a man is tempted he is drawn away of his own lust failing to have self control over his desires as God commanded to him to have. Weak flesh does not excuse one's choice in sinning. Man is not born with inability to control his desires therefore it is man's culpability in choosing to give in to his desires rather than choosing to control them.

 

[Tradidi]

What Paul did, he chose to do for Paul says "that I do".

I don't think you're reading that correctly.

"For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do." (Romans 7:15)

Paul does not what he wills (wants), but he does what he hates (not wants). That's so obvious he's talking about what we call the concupiscence of the flesh. How can you possibly interpret this as Paul does so therefore he wants it? Paul is saying exactly the opposite as what you're trying to conclude.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I don't think you're reading that correctly.

"For I do not that good which I will: but the evil which I hate, that I do." (Romans 7:15)

Paul does not what he wills (wants), but he does what he hates (not wants). That's so obvious he's talking about what we call the concupiscence of the flesh. How can you possibly interpret this as Paul does so therefore he wants it? Paul is saying exactly the opposite as what you're trying to conclude.

Paul said "that I do" meaning the sins he committed was due to a willful choice, not due to how he was born. When men sin in moments of weakness it is a choice.

Weakness = lack of self control. Man is responsible for self control and it is sinful for not having it. I posted in my last post that God created man with desires....desire for sleep, food, water, love, sex, companionship, approval among peers, etc. Is man's weaknesses and sinning God's fault for creating man with desires of the flesh? Or is man responsible for his choices in either choosing to have self control over those desires or not?

 

[Tradidi]

Paul said "that I do" meaning the sins he committed was due to a willful choice, not due to how he was born. When men sin in moments of weakness it is a choice.

Weakness = lack of self control. Man is responsible for self control and it is sinful for not having it. I posted in my last post that God created man with desires....desire for sleep, food, water, love, sex, companionship, approval among peers, etc. Is man's weaknesses and sinning God's fault for creating man with desires of the flesh? Or is man responsible for his choices in either choosing to have self control over those desires or not?

If doing means choosing to you, then not doing must also be choosing, since a choice is always between two or more options, either doing or not doing. So basically, when Paul says literally "I don't do the things I want I to do, but I do the things I do not want to do" you turn that right around and say that Paul "does the things he wants to do, and does not do the things he does not want to do". In other words, you interpret Paul as saying that he wants to do evil and does it, and does not want to do good and does it not.

If you read all of chapter 7 you will see Paul saying the same things several times in different ways. For example in verse 20: "Now if I do that which I will not, it is no more I that do it: but sin that dwelleth in me." Again, this is so clear and explicit, "it is no more I that do", i.e. it is no longer his choice, "but sin that dwelleth in me", i.e. concupiscence of the flesh.

Anyway, I cannot understand how you could possibly read something and understand the complete opposite of the words you are reading. It makes no sense. This is the end of any meaningful discussion to me. I wish you all the best.